Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Sean's post in another thread reminded me of a couple of thought experiments that I often pose to people in FRC. I thought it might generate some interesting discussion here.

1. You're competing at a 30 team regional, your last event of the season, and your team is not qualified to attend the Championship. Would you rather be:
A) The number 4 Alliance Captain and lose in the quarterfinals OR
B) The last pick of Alliance Selection of the #1 alliance (A.K.A. The 24th pick) and win the Regional

2. You're competing in a division at Championship. Would you rather be:
A) The number 4 Alliance Captain and lose in the division quarterfinals OR
B) The last pick of Alliance Selection of the #1 alliance (A.K.A. The 24th pick) and win Championship

The spread of responses I've seen have usually been about 50-50 for question #1 and 25-75 for question #2. Curious to see what people here think.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Personally, I would always prefer the "control your destiny" approach and be an alliance captain (or I should say be in position to be a captain... Accepting an invitation from a higher ranked captain is always a good option too!).

For me, it's not about winning a blue banner. It's about the experience my students have at the event. And frankly, I just think it's a better experience to be an alliance captain, formulate your alliance according to your scouting information, and providing the leadership the alliance needs to be successful. Being a first pick for another alliance gives you some of this as well, as it can then be a join decision for the second pick. Whether we win or lose doesn't really matter.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I think it greatly depends on the regional, but in a good amount of instances I don't believe the last pick of the first alliance contributes nearly as much as the first two robots. That being said, being essentially the 4th best robot at the competition (yeah I know it doesn't actually work like that) would make me feel a lot better than being handed a gold medal instead of earning one. of course it doesn't feel very good losing in the quarterfinals either.

Championships on the other hand has a much bigger and better field to choose from. If you want to win world champs that third robot is very crucial just like the second bot.
Originally I was going to put 1a and 2a but after more thought I went with 1a and 2b

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I tend to think about FRC from a district point of view these days :rolleyes:.

In practice, the decision would be made without knowing the event outcome (i.e., lose in QF vs. win event) so the conditional decision (with given outcome) would have a different bias.

Playing robots late on a Saturday afternoon is one of best experiences FRC student team members can have, and it is pretty good for mentors as well. On that basis I choose B both times (conditionally) but would choose A both times if the outcome were not given.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Agreed, my answers would change a lot if we were competing under the district qualification system.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Question A becomes much different when you are in a district system. Being the last pick means at minimum you are the 9 seed where nobody in the top 8 gets picked. So you would get 16 points from seeding. Then you get 1 point from getting picked last, and 30 points for winning. So you come out with 47 points. Being the 4 seed gives you 19 points, with an extra 13 from seeding, which gives you 32 points. So from a pure points perspective, winning from the 24th pick is better then loosing in the QF from the 4th seed. However, when the real world starts being added, that 24th pick is probably going to be in the low seeds, which would take away about 8 points. That turns the delta from +15 to +7. Add in likelyhood to get awards, and the actual likelyhood of making it to the semis, and I personally would take the 4th seed route. Especially with a game like this, were the 3rd pick was usually relegated to a ramp. That would mean we failed at our goal of building a competitive robot.

As for champs, I would pick being the 24th pick every time. At champs, the 24th pick is what makes or breaks the alliance, and I would gladly be the robot that makes that alliance. In addition, you could be dropping because of bad scouting, not because of a bad robot (Cough 973 2011 Cough)

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I think part of it depends on what kind of a team you are striving to be. In the moment I would say most people would prefer to be the 24th pick and win the event. There are some very strong, reputable teams who have fallen in the draft to the 22nd-24th.

If your long term goal is to see your team win events more frequently you need to learn to control your own destiny which usually comes at a cost of losing in the quarterfinals more than you'd like for a time until you transition from being one of the teams picked on the back end of the draft to one of the teams at the top everyone wants to be with.

3467 was an alliance captain on Archimedes in 2013 (losing to the division champions of 33, 469, and 1519) and in 2014 we were the 29th pick as the fourth member on the #5 alliance of 2590, 1625, and 1477 which ended up winning the Archimedes division. In all honesty we needed both experiences. 2013 showed us that with some hard work we really could make a name for ourselves and stand on our own being an alliance captain at the championship. 2014 was a lesson in learning from very experienced teams who are making their own reputations of continued success and well rounded programs on and off the field we learned a lot.

At the end of the day they each had their pros and cons. 2013 we lost in the quarters but finishing as a captain was huge. 2014 ended with a banner but our role was with our robot off the field.

If I had my choice I'd take be your own captain. You won't make it to the finals or Einstein or win the event if you don't learn how to assemble and alliance and develop strategy to make it to the semi-finals.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

In my experience there is nothing more inspiring for a group of students than winning a blue banner. Striving for excellence is a lot easier when you've had a taste of it. That being said, I wouldn't want to be the 24th pick and win if I had an awful robot and was told to sit in the corner, but if I was on a team and was picked 24th to play an important role, then I would embrace it. 1058s only regional win came when we were picked 23rd (last pick on 2 seed) but that win changed the culture of our team forever.

Just because you get picked last doesn't mean you can't be a good team.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I'll take excellence over success in any scenario. Granted, being an alliance captain does not automatically translate into excellence, and more often than not all the teams playing in the eliminations at CMP are excellent.

I also think this would be more interesting if you switched the 24th pick to the 25th in the second scenario. Would people rather win a Championship when not playing a match in the eliminations than being a division alliance captain?

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I'd choose 1A and 2B simply because its been the most realistic scenario for our team as far back as I can remember.
In fact, we were the #4 alliance at CMPS this year falling into that bracket once again. But at least we got over the hurdle and made it to Einstein......finally.
Just a side note: We were the only division where neither the #1 or #2 alliance advanced to Einstein.

We were never the 24th pick ever, but I'd take it in a heartbeat if given the opportunity or situation. Only once we fell below that at 2011 IRI as the 4th alliance partner. Worked out well for us and at least we got to play in the final match that won it all, while contributing.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I'd like to win.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

1B and 2B. I'd always rather have the win. With proper marketing, a win can be used as a tool to strengthen your team's relationship with schools, local businesses, and your community. Plus, this situation probably means I am playing with teams more experienced than mine--which by my experience learning from them is far more useful for team development/growth than being a captain.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

And if you're getting picked at an event of any kind of size (most regionals in the southeast are well over 50 teams, sometimes over 60), it means you weren't junk to begin with. So: this.

Sincerely,

Alliance 1's last pick
Alliance 1's last pick
Alliance 2's backup
Alliance 2's last pick

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

+1; my team didn't win an even this year but got to Worlds, while last year we won a district and a district chairman's award and didn't qualify. in the case of a district, I'd rather my team be a captain.

that being said, at a regional competition, I'd rather win something that qualifies my team for champs (whether it's being the 24th pick, getting engineering inspiration, or whatever), because I firmly believe that championships is one of the absolute best experiences one can have. once my team's at champs though, I want to win on personal merit- scouting, robot skills, etc. so while I wouldn't mind being the 24th pick, if it was what our performance made us deserve, I'd rather be ranked higher if we performed in a way that made us deserve that ranking. I never go to worlds expecting to be on einstein (well, except freshman year, but that doesnt count because I didnt understand what world-class play looked like at that point :P), because you can be the best robot in the world, and not make it due to any number of reasons.

also, being a 22nd pick (it's almost a 24th, just like we almost won our division) this year at champs showed me that later picks can be done to fill an extremely important niche role in an alliance (uprighting cans was ours), and aren't always the same as late picks at districts/small regionals. or they can be overlooked: 1671 was the 25th pick on the alliance that won einstein, and they could make 3 6-high stacks on a good day

TLDR: I like going to champs, but once there, I want my team to be ranked as well as it deserves, and just have a fun time while I'm there regardless of the outcomes. also late picks can be vital

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Simply put, #blubannerz.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

For me, 1A and 2A, without a doubt. I have had a few experiences being dragged to high placement as the last pick (and one being carried by excellent partners as an unworthy captain), with lousy, dysfunctional robots. They weren't fun, but they developed a very strong ability to gauge success through metrics other than final placement. To me, placing as a captain or early pick that doesn't make it far almost always represents a greater accomplishment for a team than a 3rd robot, even a well-done, role-player 3rd robot.

The "B" options are interesting because, while mid-range alliances that get eliminated quickly tend to be forgotten by the greater community, everyone in the community can point to several "golden examples" of picture-perfect 3rd robots, which were extremely simple to build, did their job perfectly, and had a major impact on their alliances. 1503 in 2011. 4334 in 2012. 148 in 2008 (calling this one "simple," or a good example of low resource design kinda baffles me, but a lot of people do so and it works with my point, so I'll include it). That pure ramp bot that won your local regional in 2007. And so on. And it's very easy, and in many ways completely correct, for a team to look at these success stories, decide "we should do that!", and build a robot which explicitly targets this 3rd robot position. Especially if part of what a team is after is greater recognition in the community.

The problem with this mentality is twofold. First, contrary to popular belief, it's actually really hard, and I would argue not always fully possible, to be an ideal 3rd robot through designing to be a role player, or at least to spend a season with the intent of being an ideal 3rd robot. Building a sophisticated robot capable of being a contender is hard in some very real, obvious ways. It takes a lot of engineering skill to design effectively. It takes a lot of money to put together. It takes a lot of time to assemble it, program it, and practice with it enough to get the most out of it. Building a robot like 4334, on the other hand, is hard in a very different way. It's hard to do in-depth enough game analysis to be reasonably confident in your decision to depart from the "expected" strategy. It's hard to have the guts to intentionally design a robot that will probably not win a regional, and depend on other means to get to the world championship to play the role it was meant for. It's hard to convince stubborn people to abandon the "exciting" parts of the game. It's hard to judge where to draw the line between strategic flexibility, and unneeded features which take away from the core objective. It's hard to define simplicity, to judge exactly how simple a given mechanism will be, and determine whether or not a means of adding percieved simplicity is going to make your life more difficult in the long run, or paint yourself into a corner (My team messed up bigtime on this one this year). It's hard to design a robot, even a very simple one, that radically departs from the "stock" design from the past game this year's game follows closely, from Ri3D and other prototypes emerging, especially when success at 2B essentially depends on near-flawless execution. It's hard to convince teams that your little robot is the best possible partner for them, especially if your chosen strategy really doesn't play out very much during qualifying matches.

And it's very hard to pick out the winning, genuinely useful support roles from those that just don't work out. Some examples of robots I have seen from each of the past few years, where the team behind them probably truly believed they were building "the next 4334" at the time:

• 2015: Pure canburgling robots, with well made, robust, well-engineered systems, which were too integral to the design to be upgraded enough to be competitive with elite or even semi-elite "swinging post" style canburglers. 2015 was an especially bad year for this, as at high levels of play, 3rd partners were either entirely cheesecaked creations with none of the initial design goals/intent present in the finished product, or 2nd tier human loaders with the exact same strategic goals and design elements as their slightly faster captains. Rigid specialization just didn't work out for anybody this year, and it won't necessarily work out in future years. This is another wrinkle in the difficulty of the design process for one of these robots -- teams may single-mindedly seek out a strategy that fits this mold, when an effective one really doesn't entirely exist.
• 2014: Pure goalie robots designed to man the goalie zone in teleop, with either no ball manipulation at all, or only as a total afterthought. Robots centered around catching.
• 2013: In most cases, otherwise immobile pure 30 point climbers. This one doesn't quite fit as well, since I think most of the teams who did this primarily under performed due to underestimating the difficulty of the 30 point climb, instead of strategic error. I also saw a "feeder station" robot, designed to emulate the human loader station and ferry disks down-field to their partners, which ended up just slowing things down. It didn't work out well.
• 2012: This year, most of the side/specialist objectives were actually highly worthwhile if performed with high quality execution, one of the reasons that 2012's probably my favorite game of all time. Still, I ended up seeing a lot of robots that perceived certain specialty tasks (bridge tipping and facilitating triple balances, mostly), as being much more difficult and involved than they were, and developed huge systems that encompassed their entire robot to achieve these things with authority, when in the end, almost negligible additions to otherwise fully featured robots like passive wedges or stingers ended up outperforming these dedicated designs. This is yet another area where teams going for this kind of strategy need to be extremely careful: If you zero in on a task and devote your robot to it, it's very easy to allow the design freedoms that this gives you to cause your design to spiral out of control, or skip straight past the easiest solutions because of the perceived difficulty of the task, when simple passive additions can often be the very fastest or most reliable way of accomplishing a task. Again, look at teams who centered their entire robots around canburgling, vs. those who used dead-simple auxiliary systems. Which ones were winning races?

Ultimately, while I think that it's extremely important for teams to build within their means and be realistic with their design goals, designing explicitly to be a specialty-role 3rd robot can actually be a much bigger risk with less payoff than building a mid-level robot with very conventional objectives. I admire the teams that do this and succeed greatly, but I also think that there's some of the "monkeys at typewriters" effect in play: there's an element of luck in identifying subtle, alternative strategies or nuanced specialty roles in a game that has never been played before, and with enough FIRST teams working away at the problem, there will be some bad solutions, some good solutions, and the occasional great solution. Of course, the more skilled, insightful, and dedicated you are, and the more you work at it, the greater your chance of being one of the "great solutions." But I think that it's misleading to describe this approach as safe, or low risk.

Additionally, back to the question of "which type of robot represents "success," or team growth, better?", I'd point to the history of the classic examples of B-type teams in the years after their B-type year. I can't think of any teams that consistently target, and nail, this type of strategy and role year after year. It seems like most of them either float around this approach for years, and are very hit-and-miss during this time, or move on to more conventional designs, and may ultimately reach positions as alliance captains, but not necessarily immediately. 4334 built a full court shooter which missed elims at their first regional, then a pretty conventional 2014 robot (albiet with a revolutionary stupid-simple strategic innovation which permanently altered the game dynamics). 148 built upon their 2008 season to become one of FIRST's biggest powerhouses, but nobody would call their designs these days "simple." And so on. It's clear that the teams who have walked this path see growth beyond being the 3rd robot as a valuable thing for their program, even if there's a period where they don't get quite as many blue banners.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I predict if the first question didn't involve you qualifying for Champs there would be a big difference.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I would think it varies by person, team, and year based on what one’s capabilities and reasons for wanting to win are. If you want to win to prove that you can build a truly excellent machine, then that makes sense and you’d be more inclined to answer the A's. If you don’t believe you can dominate but want experience being around the teams who do, then that makes sense, too, and you’d probably rather pick the B's.

How beneficial either option can be for a given team depends on what they recognize as their biggest areas for growth. As long as a team is willing to use their end result, be it failure or success, and milk it for every opportunity it presents to improve their program, then they are clearly doing it right. Sometimes improving means testing your formula by trying to dominate, sometimes it means doing everything you can to be around the teams who have got it down; it just depends on where you feel your program is at right now.

This is coming from someone on a team who has been going for B's in order to get to champs and experience as much as possible, but may be finally ready to aim to dominate because of what being there has taught us.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Being an alliance captain and being a last pick also depends on the game. For a game like this year, it was physically impossible to beat the 1st or 2nd placed alliances(it just wasn't fun). In a game like this you would want to a last pick. However, in a game like last year where anything could happen, I wouldn't mind taking my chances as an alliance captain. For instance, our team's robot wasn't able to pick up a ball and had mecanum wheels, we got picked by the 7th placed alliance captain and due to good planning and driving skills we won the competition. Also on the case of anything can happen, that year our team managed to become 2nd place alliance captain and got out in the finals, just an example of how anything can happen. In a game like this year, I would much rather be a pick than a captain

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I wish.....

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

On that perspective, i'd feel better to loose in division semis as an alliance captain or 1st pick rather than going on Einstein as a 3rd pick and not even playing

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Joe G's post is awesome, even if slightly walking away from the original question (as is to be expected). I agree with it almost 100%.

A lot of this is confirmation bias in play. For every really successful "3rd robot" the community can name, numerous others that failed to reach eliminations or were bounced early are forgotten. Many simply aren't the same quality as the "golden examples," and many more simply didn't have the good fortune of ending up on the right alliance.


There were other teams that used the "bounceback pass" before 4334. Maybe not always a literal bounce off their catapult, but the tactic was quite popular during the qualification matches at MAR championship, and had a few incidents before that.

I wouldn't even call their 2008 robot "simple." The swerve drive they built is already beyond the capability of most teams, let alone packing it all into such a tiny package.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I wouldn't remotely consider it simple either, and yet I'm constantly hearing it described as such, and lumped in with some of the more classical examples.

(I could write a whole white-paper on gross misuse of the word "simplicity," often retroactively, within the FIRST community).

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Interestingly in my two years as a student on 4607 we were the 23rd pick at a regional of 62 teams in 2013, and the number 2 alliance captain at the Minnesota State Championship in 2014. In 2013 we won the Northstar Regional as that low functioning 3rd robot, and in 2014 lost in the finals at the State Championship. So I've more or less lived the scenario and can speak to how both felt, and the impact both had on 4607.

So in terms of impact on the team and team growth following an event, there is no better thing than winning. Following our 2013 regional win, our community hopped on the bandwagon and hasn't hopped off yet. People who were rooting against us stopped. Sponsors who had already given, gave even more so we could attend the world championship. Not only did winning bolster our community support. It also gave us the ultimate oppurtunity to improve our robot at champs. We didn't really make waves at champs as a rookie team, and 3rd robot, I think we seeded 76th. However, the improvements we made there to our team and robot put us in the perfect position to win the 2013 MN State Championship (again as a 3rd robot).

On the flip side the community reaction to our losing the state championship in 2014 was more subdued. Granted getting second place at State is still going to be celebrated (I would imagine losing in the quarters of a regional would be a much harder sell). Losing the regional, even as a captain, doesn't allow for the team growth that inevitably happens at champs. As much as most of us hate the championsplit, FIRST's reasoning behind it (that Champs is a life changing experience) has validity. It is a life changing event.

With all of that being said, I'm more proud of my team's accomplishment as an alliance captain. When people ask me about my greatest accomplishments in life, the first item on the list, so far, is leading 4607 to that alliance captain role.

TL;DR in terms of team growth and community impact (making it loud), I'll choose winning everytime, regardless of our robot's contribution. In terms of personal feelings of accomplishment I'll choose captain status every time.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I chose 1A and 2B.

If we're the last pick at a regional event, I'm still happy, but I would still think we didn't do a very good job at that event. At least that's what I would think in my head.

If we're the last pick in our division at the championship event, we were picked over 40+ teams and I'd still feel great about it.

I think it comes down to the number of teams and the competitiveness of an event for me.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Hi Karthik, interesting question...
I can't speak for my team, but I would like to share my own thought on this.

I'm in a different type of competition... and that is... both to adapt/learn and conquer being able to build a robot, and second to learn how to beat the 6 week clock. To me that's the win... It is like bowling... when I bowl I focus all my attention on hitting the mark... keeping my arm straight aligned to a particular board as I follow through to the release of the ball... if I hit or miss my mark... then I leave it up to chance to determine the final outcome. (That advice was passed down to me from someone who was/is pretty good at it).

Ultimately it's like we are all thrown in a deck of cards and shuffled up... it's a game of chance as well as skill... and it's really a matter of adapting to the current situation at hand... if the moment of opportunity arises can we adapt? Adapting is the real win... not only in FRC, but in life as well. Also I think it is important to build good relationships with others while we are there. So since my definition of winning is a bit different... I pick whichever gives the best positive inspiring experience for the team, and so that really is on a case-by-case basis.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

In 2014 with our inbounding robot we were pretty much destined to loose if we were anything but 2nd/3rd pick. If the competition was so uncompetitive that we made it to the 4 alliance captain in 2014 it would nullify any personal achievement gained from reaching that position. Last pick all the way!

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Interesting topic. Thanks, Karthik, for posting the thread.

When I was a student, my team had a fair amount of success. In our four wins, we captained our alliance to victory 3 times. At times, we were also relatively mediocre, low 1st round or 2nd round picks. I never really felt how it felt to be just okay, but I did find myself questioning how much I, personally, did to win those wins. And although I was a leader on my team (DL nominee, etc.), my conclusion was that I didn't do that much of the overall effort, and that didn't feel great.

Since I've joined my current team, I've been more involved in the match-by-match minutiae of competing. We're frankly not as competitive as the team I was on as a student. At our events, when we're low picks, it can feel as if we're "along for the ride." And that doesn't feel great. We've had one event when I really felt we ought to win (we didn't). We got our top choice of pick and a great second. Our strategy seemed to be effective, and altogether that felt great, even if we didn't win.

I personally am not sure I could stand winning a world championship as the 3rd or 4th team on the alliance. I wouldn't want the attention nor the praise. Rarely does an alliance have equal contributors and even more rarely do they win (they tend to be lower seeded). If I'm going to win a world championship, I don't want it to be because there were 23 better teams on my division. And I don't want it to be after my alliance knocks out a whole bunch of more deserving teams.

Don't get me wrong, I'll take the win and turn it into whatever resources I can. And in the situation of knowing roughly I'll be a low pick, I'd rather get picked by a more competitive alliance than less, even if that's a few spots later. But I'd be more proud of the captained win at a district than the dragged-along win at the championship.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Captain at the regional level and Captain at Champs(but only by a slight bit), because I like captaining and at that last slot unless you're at the most competitive regional ever you probably wouldn't get selected or have a good champs showing(not experience however because it would be good for your team).

For Champs, my (now former) team made a push this and last year to be a team that gets to champs frequently and to make elims and specifically to not be a backup bot... so I'm gonna with captaining as well. The 4th slot gives me a weird vibe though cause that means you probably didn't scout very well, you yourself might not have deserved it, or something broke.

Also, my team literally did the 1A and 2B last year and it isn't that bad other than knowing people didn't scout except your alliance captain.

However 2B gets you on Einstein and being on Einstein is an amazing experience for drive team members even if you aren't playing

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

1A and 2B for me.

1A because I rather be an alliance captain and learn from what caused our alliance to get knocked out in the quarters rather than be picked last at a regional (I wouldn't complain for either scenarios, but I'd prefer 1A). I rather use it as a learning experience.

2B because being picked at champs is pretty impressive, and so is being picked last. I wouldn't mind being ranked 4th either and losing in quarter finals, that itself is an accomplishment (being ranked 4th and competing in championship elims).

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Our 2014 robot didn't even have an intake and we were an alliance captain that nearly won an event. To that point team 900 won the North Carolina Regional without an intake as the inbounder. Depending on how it was done, the inbounder could be a successful captain *cough secret sauce cough*. Also any time you can attain captain status you've done well regardless of the competiton. I'd argue there isn't an FRC event out there where being a captain is no big deal to the average team.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

This one is too hypothetical to vote. Coming at it realistically along the arrow of time, I'd rather we rank 4th and be eliminated; I wouldn't know that that alternative time line existed. On the other hand, if I had a "one wish Genie" who offered me the choice to make one or the other happen, and I had trust in his/her ability to deliver: I'd go for the win at regional where the team would get the further inspiration of going to championships, and experience a great boost in marketability with sponsors. At CMP I'd probably stick with #4.

We were essentially in the 1B position this year; we were the second pick of the #2 alliance at Bayou and our alliance was victorious. The even better news was that we were picked by Breakaway and Wildcat for an unusual capability that we intentionally set out to develop; we decided that we'd rather be a good landfill robot that could get game pieces off the step and flip totes than a relatively poor HP station 'bot. We had only four seniors this year. Half of the team members (and nearly all of mechanical) were rookies, so we knew we had to keep it super simple, and play to ally with, not compete against, the top tier teams at Bayou. During eliminations, we tunneled to the step and delivered our alliance's #4 RC from the step to the vicinity of the landmark (has anyone used this term on CD?), scored totes, and brought in a pretty good HP noodle thrower to boot*. Had it been match play, we would have won most if not all of our matches by fewer points than our team scored; this does not count the 20-30 points our fourth RC enabled our alliance partner to score. If the trip to CMP had meant that we only provided a plate for our alliance partners' cheesecake, especially if our contribution didn't seem to make a real difference, I would probably have picked ranking #4 and being eliminated in quarters.

* Between 3937's HP and ours, we elicited the only "noodle net" that I've heard was deployed. Each of them put at least one noodle over.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

<long story> So this year at Midknight Mayhem we surprised ourselves and ended in 7th seed, which meant we would be an alliance captain. This was my first competition experience as team captain, and our team's first time being an alliance captain at any competition in many years. I realized while I was standing waiting for my turn to make our first pick that it is possible for us to be picked by a higher seed alliance, and I would have to choose whether or not to accept. We are a small program, so I wasn't in contact with any kind of scouting group in the stands to make decisions for me. And any team there who did scouting or knew us from the regular season knew that we could really help an alliance if and only if we had strong alliance partners, so getting picked by those strong possible alliance partners wasn't out of the question. What I decided in the moment while I was standing there was that I would accept if we were picked by another alliance captain. Sure being an alliance captain would be cool, but winning the event would be even cooler, so we should do whatever it takes to try to win the event, even if it means not being an alliance captain. We worked under/with some great teams this year and contributed to every alliance we were in, even as a 2nd pick, let alone a 1st pick. In the end we didn't get picked, and we got out in quarter finals as 5th alliance captains. It was still a great experience, but I think I would have been happier if we would have been picked by a top alliance captain and won the event. Blue banners aren't everything, but they definitely help a small team that is struggling with sponsorship, membership, and recognition. Now this is different than either scenario presented in the OP because it was an off-season event, but the principles still stand (it's probably closer to CMP than a regional because winning doesn't qualify you for anything else). </long story>

That was my experience with this decision. I hope to be lucky enough to have to make it again in a regular season competition.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

If you win a regional, you get to experience championships. That's worth more to me than being an alliance captain.
If you win champsionships, it's a massive plus for team morale, even if you weren't the first pick. Plus, in 10 years, nobody really remembers how you won (except mentors); they just see the banner.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

We are most of the time a top 8 robot in the regionals we attend, but rarely are we in the top 1 or 2. After a while, losing in the quarters or semis as the #4 captain starts to get old. We know that we had a good year, but it sure would be nice to win once in a while, no matter how it happens:)

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

After making regional eliminations 11 times in a row (almost always as an alliance captain or 1st pick) but not ever having won one, I would much rather win a regional than be an alliance captain even if the only way my team would be picked 24th was due to controversial circumstances (sandbagging, cheesecake, etc.).

Here is where the exact circumstances changed my selection. If I knew that the #1 alliance was almost guaranteed to win there division (something like the 254,111,973 alliance in 2011) then I would much rather be their 4th alliance member than go against them in the quarter finals even if it means my team will not likely play on the field. However if the #1 seeded team is weaker, I would be more inclined to risk forming my own alliance, even if my team would only captain alliance #4 or lower.

In a less hypothetical situation, If I had to make 1114s championship decision in 2011 I would have declined 1771 knowing with good scouting data I may be able to beat them with an alliance constructed from the #8 position despite the risk of missing elims if 1771 decided to scorch earth or all alliance captains avoid inter picking to keep out 1114 and knowing my chances of winning the world championship where nearly 0 if I chose to form an alliance with 1771.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

At the end of the day it's alot easier to go to sponsors and ask for things when you have hardware to show.

Also while winning isn't everything ask those teams who rarely if ever win what winning does for their team the next year. Sometimes being that team who might just be along for the ride can do more than being that middle 1st round pick.

Generally I'd take qualifying for champs and then alliance captain at champs but I took it from the perspective I mentioned above and voted for both option B.

Ask 5012 if they'd give up their banner and trophy to be the #4 alliance captain on Newton this year...

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Winning in both instances. Why? Winning Champs is obvious; the third robot still has to be pretty good, you get to win the World Championship, you get to go next year, etc. etc. So I'm going to discuss why I'd rather win a regional as a last pick than go out in the quarters

Firstly for personal reasons; I haven't been on a team the year they've won a regional since 2009. Kinda tired of playing "1,000 Ways To Lose A Regional".

More important than that, winning is inspiring. Not so much the act of getting a trophy but the act of playing with the best teams at the event, getting a taste of high level play, and learning unique ways for your robot to contribute. A bid to Championships can give a team the second wind they need in order to pursue a major rebuild to become more competitive - it's motivating. Playing with the best teams gives students hands-on access to the drive teams, strategy, pit crews, and design details of the best teams at their event.

One of the biggest turning points for my former team (2791) was when we had the good fortune to be selected by 2168 and 118 at the CT Regional in 2012. While we didn't win the event (see: Einstein that year for more information), we got to play with one of the best teams on the east coast and one of the best teams in the entire world. We got to see how the best teams operated. We had a shining example of a stunningly simple but effective robot in 2168, as well as a beautifully engineered masterpiece in 118. Two amazing drive teams that played well under pressure served as role models for future student drivers on the team. The pit crews of both teams worked hard not only to upgrade their own robots, but also ours, leaving improvements that stuck for the rest of the season. We wouldn't trade that experience for anything.

It's very possible that coming close to winning, but not quite reaching that point is more inspiring in the long run - 2791 is currently a team that is packed full of students and mentors whom are hungry for a regional win and willing to work hard for long hours to get there. Perhaps if a win was as "easy" as being the last pick that wouldn't happen. I guess I can't say for sure.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I think people generally use "simple" when they really mean "elegant". But that's not on subject right now.

I would much prefer the banner in both scenarios.

20 had the honor of being the Carson Championship alliance's second pick and only played in one eliminations match. Our team knew (and advised our alliance) that we'd be better off with 1711 on the field and their wicked fast canburglars than with us on the field. We consciously made the choice to go for the banner rather than lose in divisional eliminations. And we acheived our season goal of making it to Einstein.

Now given the option before alliance selections whether I'd prefer to the the #4 Captain or the #24 pick, I'd pick the #4 captain every time. However regardless of how my team got picked, by whom, or for what reason- the competitive goal is to win the blue banner. Any method to do so without compromising my team's integrity is a method I support.

This goes even more so for 5254, because they get to attend the championship if they win a banner.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

For sure, I'm certain that most World Champs wouldn't trade their banner in this situation. However, one of the reasons I posted this is that I had a discussion with a member of a past World Champion who said they felt their Championship "didn't count" because they weren't the Alliance Captain or first pick. It was a perspective I didn't expect to hear from someone who had a gold medal to show from the situation.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Given I don't know which team you are talking about, I can see this person's opinion making sense if they didn't play a huge role in the alliances success. Some late picks are very valuable and shouldn't feel this way (16 in 2012 and 610 in 2013 come to mind), but some late picks don't really do much and I can understand it not feeling like they deserve the win. Getting carried through eliminations isn't the greatest feeling in the world. In the end it comes down to the team's goals.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I can understand this, and I've heard it from some very prominent teams even when it comes to just winning a regional.

I don't know if it is still like this but FTC used to only move the alliance captain on to the next level of competition so being a pick didn't garner you anything but a potential event win...

I liked the rule back in the day that said you had to play all members of an alliance in each round of elims(granted the games were 2v2 with 3 member alliances). I think that they should bring it back(at least at champs where its the only place of 4 team alliances) as it would add another level to scouting. Though if they move to 4 v 4 like I've heard rumblings the last couple of years they might get rid of the back up robot all together at champs...

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

This is a difficult question. I'd enjoy going to worlds, and the inspiration my team could get by going would definitely make me agree to just being a pick and winning. Not sure about the question for world's yet though, I never have gone there!

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

The reaction of peers/the community also plays an important role in how a team feels about being the third or fourth robots on a winning alliance. In many discussions over the years I've heard things like, "Well it doesn't really count" or "You have X banners but you really only earned Y". While publicly we acknowledge and congratulate the winning alliances of regionals, off the record the conversations look more like the above examples. I will admit I've had similar conversations over the years and I'm sure many other FIRSTers have as well at some point in their time with FRC.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Winning feels good and can often bootstrap future success, so in both cases I'd personally choose "winning".

But from the outside looking in, if you were to ask me which is a "more impressive" accomplishment, I'd probably go with the #4 seed in both cases. I have seen many #1 seeded alliances where the last robot makes significant contributions; I have seen relatively few #1 seeded alliances where the last robot would not have been replaceable without a loss in effectiveness by one or more of the other 21 robots that had picked or been picked before it.

For this reason, I am a BIG fan of a district points system. Winning the tournament as a third robot is worth something, sure...but consistently seeding high is worth just as much or more. If a #4 seed was worth more qualifying points than a last pick blue banner, then I would change my answer to the original question (at the Regional/District level).

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

This is one of the many benefits of the District system. At the 2014 Clifton District Event, Team 1257 was picked in the second round by the #2 alliance and we won the event. We never felt like we didn't deserve a blue banner because we had a really cohesive alliance.
The win was an inspiration. We had a taste of success and wanted more. We made extensive improvements to our robot and pushed to earn enough District Points to qualify for MAR Championship. While we didn't get picked at our second district, we ended up as the #2 Alliance Captain at MAR Champs. We lost in quarters to the winning alliance, but the success we found in 2014 motivated us to improve our team as much as possible for 2015.
In order to reproduce our success, we put a lot of effort into increasing our resources, improving our design and fabrication process, and improving our business program. This season was our first season ever that we were picked at both our District Events (the #7 alliance captain at Mount Olive, and the second pick of the Finalist #2 alliance at North Brunswick). This year was our best yet, and it was largely inspired by that win at Clifton.
TL;DR We've found that success breeds success, and that can begin with an event win as a late pick.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I can understand your point at the regional level, but I would wager that there has never been a World Champion alliance where the second pick did not play a crucial role in the success of the alliance. If an alliance captain dismisses the importance of the second pick at the championship level, they might as well forefeit their chance at winning the world championship.

Some examples:
2015: 1671 was a competitive scoring robot that could human load without a tethered ramp and place multiple capped stacks of six.
2014: 2848's kiss passing, defense, and occasional long truss shots helped seal the deal for the 254 alliance.
2013: 610 was one of the most consistent cyclers in the world.
2012: 16's ball starvation and feeding strategy was crucial to the success of the alliance.
2011: 973 had the fastest minibot in the world and one of the highest traction drive trains at the event, with strong driving.
2010: 177's ability to pass balls forward, occasionally score from midfield, and consistently hang were part of what gave the alliance the edge in the final matches.
2009: 971 was a very strong scorer with the ability to human load fairly easily as well.
2008: 148's maneuverability and strategic defense meant that they could often prevent opponents from acquiring game pieces or scoring for long periods of time. Check out some of the later matches on Einstein to see how this worked.

I could go on, but I think you get the point.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Agreed. I think MAYBE two of those alliances could have won with a different robot for their third partner.

He might also be talking about members of 74 or 5012, who also fall into the "not a captain/first pick" category.
These two had different, less tangible contributions to their alliances than the picks you listed above, so I could understand that kind of feeling.

There are students on 20 that don't feel like we "deserved" our divisional win this year even though I can point to examples where we contributed off-the-field to help with the win. It's a difficult mindset for some people to buy into.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I think the point I was trying to make wasn't what came across in my post so I'll try again. My point was that a team that gets picked in the second round and plays an important role may not have been happy about it because they saw themselves as a premiere bot of an alliance, not the third robot/role player. I fully understand how important these third robots are, but maybe they were expecting more out of themselves.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I'd like to win.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I think it depends on your perspective.

We never played on Saturday afternoon during our first 3 seasons, and I would have given anything just to be in the position to select 1A or 1B. Now that we have won blue banners at districts & district champs, I would always choose 1A. I would consider 1B a step backward.

We have qualified for CMP and made it into playoffs every year since 2009, but never won our division (let alone Einstein!). Therefore, I would have to go with 2B for now. If we ever do win there, I expect that I would choose 2A from that point forward.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

An interesting thing to consider would be 900 this year. They were a huge part of one of the coolest things developed in the 2015 season, but unfortunately they didn't get to play on the field. Nor did they have the chance to play with the robot that they originally designed for the game. Still they were picked for their talents and their unique position. I know a lot of that has been covered in previous threads, but Chris's defense of non-picking robots reminded me.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Ohh, we definitely played with our original robot. It got us to CMP, our alliance partners from NC seemed pretty happy with it too (and it's overly-complicated miserable arm! Curse you physics!). Nvidia even liked it.

I appreciate Karthik's question here. It's a good one to ask. I can't help but think he is either scouting with it or trolling us all though... I can't relay the conversation in its entirety because its all a bit fuzzy now but at one point he stopped and asked us if we were serious about taking a robot built in a day to Einstein. I think he was actually asking us if we really were as nuts as we seemed before we started seriously building it. The three folks from 900 involved in that conversation all said "yes" at the same time. I now know that one of the things to look for in an alliance partner has nothing to do with their strategy or their robot but rather their determination and drive to win.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I just meant after Qualification rounds at CMP. I'm no detractor of your guys' awesomeness this season. Just figured it was relevant to Chris's comment.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

None of the above. I just thought this exercise was an interesting one. I know it's a question I struggle to answer myself, and also one that reveals a lot when you think about it and try to answer.

It's nearly impossible to quantify and very difficult to determine, but it's an important piece of criteria that can serve as a very beneficial deciding factor when comparing teams which are relatively even statistically.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Wisconsin, Carver (Midwest and Carson if you want to focus on the first seed)... I'd keep going but I don't need to.

I've always subscribed to the idea that winning is the highest priority. Winning is what gets you further and further each season. Of course, seeding high is generally a result of winning, but the seed itself doesn't decide how good you actually are, and it doesn't decide if you go to champs.

At an average-sized event, 45-60 teams, the last pick was better than the rest in some way. Even at an event with 30 teams, the 24th pick likely did something right, that placed them above the three other teams available to the first seed alliance. And, if they won the event, that last pick bot should be proud, because they contributed something to that first seed alliance that made it stronger than the rest, whether that be good defense, a simple yet effective pass-through assist, or the extra weight for two ramps plus the ability to put up a few extra points. Even a backup bot can contribute massively to an alliance. 1089 may have only played once in championship elims, but their immense patience and determination to help us in our cheesecake adventure was amazing. And, even in the one match they played, they made vital contributions to the alliance.

FRC isn't about blue banners, it's about inspiring students through hands-on engineering in a competitive setting. However, there's something undeniably inspirational about winning.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

This. Becoming a Captain is hard. In 2014, our team was never a captain, despite being one of the top 3 robots in our first two district events (the scheduling gods kinda hate us).

definitely

Your post was beautiful and brilliant, but I would add that some "next 4334's" (including 4334) attempted designs around uprighting the last row of totes (not that that was useful, as it turned out)

sorry, this is mostly just quoting people. I'm loving the conversation around this; it's a brilliant topic.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

So at first I voted 1A and 2B. I feel like this question says about not just a person, but an entire team honestly. In my FIRST career, I've been at the very bottom, with a robot that couldn't score all season and ranked last, to most recently winning a regional and earning our spot to the championship. All throughout that career, I've always wanted to be the #1 seed and to win the competition. I was always of the opinion that being as close to that as possible meant we were improving. I'd rather be the dominant team on the field than sit and wait to be chosen, even if it means I don't get the banner. Of course, a trip to championships is a great catalyst for change, but it just feels so much better when you're the one choosing or the one contributing the most.

At championships, I've always had the goal of just making eliminations. So at first I chose option 2B, but now that I think about it, I feel like being just an alliance captain that exits quarters is more satisfying in my mind. It means our bot played well enough (or we got lucky enough I suppose) to seed high among all of the great teams at worlds. A world championship would do wonders for a program even as a 4th robot, but it feels so much sweeter to be a captain and know your program and bots are getting to that level.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

This year my team was picked as a second pick both of our two district events. In the first one we were the last robot and picked up by the 1st seed and we won the event. Despite our 2014 season being successful, this one day of matches has been the most important one for me personally. Due entirely to team 1519's belief that we were worthwhile as partners, our scoring improved, our confidence improved, and I was able be mentored by a team that wins constantly. Soley for this reason, being picked last is completely worth it to me. Also due to this, our next event we improved greatly and in eliminations scored many of our alliance's points. However, we were knocked out in the quarterfinals due to a few mistakes.

Here's the dilemma: Because we were the last pick we earned almost no district points and as a result did not make it to district championships. But I would not have changed that for the world because the amount I learned from the highest seeded teams is so much more than what NECMP is worth.

TL;DR: 1B, 2B because learning is the most important thing, even in the district system

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Yes, being a captain is pretty satisfying at worlds, I suppose. Our team has competed in the championship playoffs many years, but the past two have been our only time as alliance captains. However, we lost in the quarters both times and that was NOT fun for competitive team members like me.

In 2009 we were the second pick by the #2 alliance that missed Einstein by 6 points. I wasn't on the team then but I would hazard a guess that they had a more inspirational Saturday than we did this past year, regardless of how well we seeded.

I chose 1A and 2B.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Forgive me... I want to translate this double negative...

I'd argue that at every FRC event, being a captain is always big deal to the average team.

I think I got that logic right... if not let me know.


I don't disagree with you ;)


But I gotta ask... why is it such a big deal? I don't get it. Is it bragging rights? Is it the hunger for power? Why is being in control such a big deal? doesn't anyone out there feel that a leadership role can be more of a facilitator role where more emphasis is ensuring that everyone has a say and then it really becomes a team effort? Anyone believe the teaching that a good follower has the ability to become a great leader?

I just don't understand... I personally feel we don't have to prove anything to anyone (especially once we overcome our own insecurities)... we just achieve excellence and people will see it... that to me is more attractive than someone who brags with blue banners. But what do I know? I guess some people need bling bling to impress others... all I care about is what is on the inside... the actual substance that makes us tick... oh well... it's all good, we are all different... makes the world more interesting. :)

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

It's that you're in a more exclusive club.

8/40 vs 24/40 is kind of a big deal, even bigger at bigger events (or at smaller events--if everybody plays in the elims, then the folks who determine who plays whom are kind of a big deal, no?).


It's also--to some extent--building a better robot. For teams that don't make eliminations routinely, being an AC is a HUGE highlight. Particularly if they are usually being picked rather than picking. It's validation of their hard work--possibly over the last X years.

For a powerhouse team, sure, AC isn't that big a deal necessarily (NOT being an AC would be a bit disappointing)--but, remember, a powerhouse tends to be in the picking position.


Just to look at a couple of scenarios:
Powerhouses are used to being ACs or (early) 1st-round picks. While being picked up in the 2nd round can be disappointing, winning sure looks good. But it's really nice to control your own destiny to a point.

An average team is used to being late 1st-round or 2nd round, maybe backup--if they aren't packing up after selections. (Depends on event size--out here, your average team is likely thinking about packing up by QFs. In districts or smaller regionals, not so much, as they're likely in the 2nd round or before.)

And then there's the outliers on the other side. You pick 'em, it makes their year that they're even playing on Saturday, because they're used to packing up right after their last match of quals. If they're an AC, somebody hand them a picklist, they'll probably need it. OTOH, maybe they're just starting their rise...

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

So if I were in a regional system, anything, absolutely anything to go to champs. And once at champs, totally would also go for the win. The reasons are different though.
I want to always qualify for champs to meet other teams, check out the robots I've been drooling over since reveal day, and enjoy the atmosphere. Honestly, the only competitions I care about getting first place at are regional and DCMP levels. Those are the ones that qualify you for champs. Like this season, North Brunswick (Week 6) felt like an off-season for me cause we qualified at TVR through EI.
At champs however, the reason I want to win is for sponsors. If you do well at champs, you can outreach to your community, to schools, and to sponsors so much easier. (It's cooler to say that your robot was third in the world than to say we were the 4th best robot on one of the eight divisions at robotics world championships and we made it to X in that division). On the three years I've been on this team, I don't think we've had a busier summer. With this kind of experience, you can turn even a 3rd pick team (which, btw, is still nothing to scuff at) into an Champs Alliance Captain (given you've got great mentors and students).

TL;DR: 1B&2B all the way except if you're at a District event, then 1A&2B. Reason for 2B: Sponsor Support in the future/ better outreach

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

As a scouting lead/ guy in alliance selection for the past two years, I never got to be the captain (my co-lead did once in the same time period). We were ranked a couple of times when I was out there, but we were always picked. To me, it's a big deal on 2 fronts. first of all, it's assurance. you know when you'll get picked, and there's no "well what if the 3rd captain picks me when I've already set everything up with the 4th alliance?" Twice at DCMP I've stood there (and I'm sure teammates have sat there) with my heart sinking, realizing that despite our merits, we won't get picked- this is the main reason I find it important. The other reason is completely personal- the PNW AV crew does highlight reels that usually include the top 8 team's representatives at some point, and I wanted to be in one :P

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Sorry... I can't not include a double negative in my posts :D My favorite part about being an alliance captain as opposed to being picked (other than the assurance of playing in the playoffs) is determining the strategy for the alliance. When you fill the role of the third robot, you're generally assigned a simple task and told not to screw it up. As the alliance captain you really get to utilize all of your preparation (scouting, plays, strategies, etc.) to its fullest potential.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Its just being competitive. Being an alliance captain is simply an accomplishment for the average team. It is a much more concrete goal than "build a good robot." I don't think wanting to be an alliance captain always is about getting other people to recognize how good your robot is, but instead just confirmation to yourself that you actually did accomplish something.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Seems I'm in the minority with a 1A + 2A pick. Interesting to note, were I to pose this question to my own team, I doubt many of them would pick the same as I. I think they would choose a combinations of 1A + 2B or 1B +2B.

Personally, I've never put as much stock in winning as the people around me. I grew up on a team that had some really good years and some really bad years. I am currently on a team that historically has had some really bad years, and lately has had some pretty okay years. I've come to appreciate simply having a robot to work with. For me, it's not about winning. It's about being competitive, and being the best I can be (which extends to my goals for my team).

Winning is secondary. I want to have the robot that every wants to see; be the team that everyone talks about. That is what I consider inspiring. Sure, winning is great and is a memorable experience in and of itself. But leaving an impression and being preserved in people's memories is a much bigger prize to me. To be the third pick on an alliance and fall into obscurity for me would be a shame. To captain an alliance will always be a greater honor to me than winning a regional.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Honestly, I believe this question tells us more of the standards of each persons region than of that one person or team. Not trying to belittle any specific regional/district event, but some may see being the 3rd robot on a #1 alliance at certain regionals/districts as still being extremely good and some may see it as riding coattails; the same would go with being the #4 Captain.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Ok I get what y'all are saying... so let's put it to the test... let's say you are 4th seed and... 1 and 2 became an alliance now 3 picks you... how big of a deal is it to be an alliance captain now? Would you accept or decline? If the answer is depends.. on what... if you accept and win... would the win feel like a victory... same questions can apply for both regional and champs.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Let's look at the district points (using the 2015 system for qualification points) for two teams at an event of 35 teams, a typical size for a district event:

Team A: Ranked #4, captain of the fourth alliance, quarterfinalist:
Team B: Ranked #24, second pick of the first alliance, wins event:
The District Points system dictates that Team B deserves more points than Team A. The 9 point disparity may not seem like a ton, but the point threshold to qualify for CMP from MAR (for example) was 104. There are three teams in MAR that could have qualified for CMP if they had just nine more points.
I found it interesting that if that #4 alliance makes it to semifinals, Team A would have 42 points compared to Team B's 41 points. This creates a much smaller gap and tips it in favor of Team A.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

From my teams' perspective, I can only answer question one from experience. For our first two years as a team, we were not picked in alliance selection. However, in 2012, we were picked twice, and the second time was situation 1B without the Champs qualification because it was a district. It was a great experience for our team, and has probably been the second-greatest source of inspiration (the first being going to Champs, even on a wait list spot) our team has gotten (and one of the most fun). Since then (including offseason events) we have made the elimination rounds at 8/12 events, and been an alliance captain twice (2014 MIBED and 2014 KK). The winning of the events' inspiration definitely contributed to that. At Kettering Kickoff, we were the fourth alliance captain with a first round exit. Although we felt accomplished to get that far as alliance captains, it wasn't nearly as inspiring and fun as being on a winning alliance. In a singular instance I'd take 1B any day, and to go further, I'd take 2B any day and be a world champion. It takes a lot of skill to be picked at Champs, no matter when you get picked, even as a backup bot.

Just my $0.02.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

1B & 2B. Because winning is winning and while being alliance captain is a great experience (and knowing how to be a good alliance captain is a critical skill set), winning still trumps it.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

1B & 2B. Everyone puts a lot of work into their robot every year. Even if our robot isn't a super effective, top tier robot, I would much rather see our team do well and work effectively in our alliance than do better in quals and come out of it possibly not making quarterfinals.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

It's cool to hear from two teams that 1519's picked late in the draft! I will say that both 1058 in 2010 and 4908 in 2015 played critical roles on our alliances... in both cases we felt like we were getting a total steal for that late in the draft at those events! I'm glad that the experiences were highlights/turning points for your teams!

1058 did anything but 'sit in the corner' at GSR in 2010... playing the all-important mid-field position moving balls from mid-field to the near zone fast enough to keep 1073 busy pushing them into goals. As I recall, 1058 was 'getting things working' throughout quals at GSR and didn't have much accuracy on the goal, but was very effective at possessing a ball and passing it on (which was all we needed!).

4908 may have physically 'sat in the corner' at UMD in 2015, but they added plenty of value, particularly for the 24th selection at a 27 team event!! They'd shown flashes in quals and had several key abilities... as long as they could get the first two totes out correctly, they were all set. I think you guys scored 2 4-stacks from the HP twice by the end of elims! Quite impressive for the 24th pick at their first event... particularly given that there were only 3 robots unpicked!

I can definitely relate to the group with positive experiences from the 'last pick' group... we were picked 23rd by 33 and 469 on Archimedes in 2013... we played a helpful role, but certainly weren't carrying our alliance. Regardless, that experience had an overwhelming impact on our team, providing us with our only CMP division win and Einstein appearance and showing us a lot about how teams compete at that level.

Conversely, we also learned a lot from flopping as the #8 captain at on Newton in 2006... selecting a successful alliance at CMP is anything but just picking your friends and implementing a similar strategy that won you a week 1 regional. Turns out both experiences can be great learning experiences... I'd say we definitely enjoyed and took more honor in the experience winning as the 'final' pick than flopping as the last captain though.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

The rookie team we picked in Montreal as a last robot (Ultime 5528) played a very important role; they got us the last can we needed to score enough points. Of course, they are not one of the best robots at the regional, but guess what? winning worlds doesn't mean either you're one of the 4 best bots worldwide. That's how FIRST works; it's about teamwork.
Winning that regional gave them a chance to experience worlds, and inspired them to win the FedEx challenge to win 15 000 dollars. They even participated in the Tesla High score along with us and Team Tators 2122.

They came to our team BBQ, and I had the chance to speak with them... They couldn't have dreamed of better. They are even more enthusiastic about next season, and that prize will surely help them do better.

TL:DR - Winning does matters for young teams

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

My take on the situation is very personal since we have recently gone though similar situations over the past couple seasons. The most notable was winning the championship with 254, 469, and 74 in 2014.


My team (and I) would not have wanted to change anything about our championship run. It was fantastic to play with (and win) with such good partners against some of the other best robots in the world. In 2014 my team was ecstatic to win the championship, but we are also realistic about how fortunate we were. We are also realistic to understand that there were probably 4-5 other teams in the division that could have filled the same role we did on the alliance.

All that being said, one of the things that is continuing to drive us to try and get better is the want to win as the alliance capt or first pick. We know we won't make it there right away but we would like to improve each year. While we didn't have the blue banner season we did last year, being picked in the first round at the championship (even though we lost in the quarter finals) to us was a personal improvement.

For this next year we hope to keep climbing the ladder. If we ended up being the 2nd pick on an alliance (24th or otherwise) and ended up winning again we would celebrate the victory, but still strive for more.



This next part is from me personally (not specifically my team)

The alternative perspective for what it's worth is that I would rather be a low alliance captain than the 4th robot on a winning alliance who didn't play. While it is great to be selected and be part of the alliance I don't think I could ever truly celebrate a championship win without our robot touching the field. I don't want to take anything away from any team who has won or will win (either a division or a championship) as the 4th robot, but for me I would rather play 2 matches on the field and loose than leave my robot on it's cart and win.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I want to point out that with the introduction of the 4th robot the last 2 years, even though those teams never entered the field, they did serve important functions. Those teams should feel that they had an equal part in the alliances' successes.

In 2014, taking 5136 limited the availability of goalie bots for other teams and gave us the back up for 1114 and an additional option to run a different mix for the autonomous routine.

In 2015, we honestly thought that 5012 would be playing in the Einstein semis and finals and that 1671 would be sitting out those rounds. The games played out differently so that we didn't use 5012. In addition, having 5012 available mooted 1114/148's threat to use their harpoon grabbers.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I agree with this. In general, I'd love to be the number x seed at an event. Usually, that means you did something right with your team in the design\strategy department and I'd consider that a success. However, I think everyone would love to stamp their ticket to cmp. The time between your last event and cmp can be used to improve as well. And as Ben mentioned earlier in the thread, winning regardless of your final qual rank has its perks as well.

For these reasons, I went with 1b and 2a but I also understand the somewhat of a paradox that creates. So I'll assume that after the regional event the team sat down and brainstormed some improvements knowing they had their CMP tickets punched and figured something out that ends up being successful.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

To add: having a backup robot on Einstein is like having bench players in baseball: you may not use them, but they aren't useless. they could play specialty roles (a really good defensive sub, or a super fast guy), or they could come in for a broken robot/injured player and keep the alliance's/team's hopes of winning alive

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Not exactly the place to ask, but while on the topic, how did 5012 eliminate that threat? Did they just have a cheesecake fast enough to beat it or was it something game-breaking like the reach around strategy? If it was a traditional can grabber fast enough to match the harpoons, is there any video of it? I haven't seen anyone discuss what they had done to beat the harpoons, only that they could.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

By the time Einstein semis came, we had been cheesecaked twice. Once with 118's cangrabbers on our main bot and again with 1678's cangrabbers on a tethered base. This would allow us to be fully engaged on the cans at least as fast as 118 and 1678 were able to.

If the 900/5012 can battle were to occur, it would leave us and 900 tangled up with all 4 cans at the center of the field, with the possibility of leaving a mess in both landfills. This would have made it difficult for 1114(and 118) to play their games effectively. We would have likely played 1671 in place of 118 as they were more proficient at the feeder station.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Mutually Assured Destruction. It would have been epic. Y'all had an amazing alliance.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

In that scenario, wouldn't it make the most sense for 1678 to be sitting on the sidelines? With only 3 cans per alliance, getting the maximum value from each can would be incredibly important. Or are you assuming that 1671 is successful at building 3 42-point stacks, and that 1678 can outscore 118 from the feeder station in raw totes?

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Well if the landfill is a mess with the 900/5012 can battle, 118 can't score that many totes from the landfill, so I guess 1678 could of outscored 118 from the feeder station. Also, 1678 can stacks to 6 I believe when just stacking totes. If you sit out 1678 in place of 5012, you take the risk of 118 creating stacks from a messy landfill or creating stacks from the feeder station (Which I think they were not capable of. Correct me I'm wrong). I think in this scenario, 1678, 1671, and 5012 would of been the best bet, but I think this alliance would run out of totes from the feeder station.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

1A/2A for what I'd choose personally... 1B/2B for the program and what the students could use right now. Echoing other sentiments, I don't want to diminish the win for teams that achieved it as a 3rd/4th pick, but being selected as that 3rd/4th robot is more heavily influenced by luck than by consistently striving to improve to where you can win events as an AC or 1st pick. Long term, I'd like to be a problem that wins consistently, which equates to 1A/2A.

That being said, what if that win in 1B/2B is what inspires the next round of freshman/sophomores to really step it up the following years to dramatically improve? Or outside of the robotics team, just inspires them period as they move on to college?

Sorry for the stream of consciousness, but I guess what it equates to is that I want our team to perform well to inspire my students. I think that the best way to do that long term is to recognize incremental improvement via better placement in tournaments (without winning), and I'd never intentionally try to play to the 24th spot just to increase my odds of winning... but if it sorted out such that we lucked into Einstein... I don't really care how we got there, the kids would be ecstatic.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I've seen cases where the last pick wasn't picked for the robot or even the driver team... expertise, scouting data, and "good luck" all come to mind.

Say 217 at champs in 2013... I remember reading that among the reasons 1986 and 1538 gambled on them (with a broken robot) was their experience and "knack for winning". Had the repairs held up, it's very possible 1538 could have pulled a 67 style sweep, or at least became one a handful of teams that have both made Einstein and won Chairman's in the same year.

No competent alliance picks the 4th bot randomly... they always are picked for a reason.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Although 1678 is probably faster than 118 at the feeder station, the Robonauts reveal video shows that they still have the capability to stack at a competitive speed from the human loader. If 1671 was entrusted to spit out 3 superstacks, which they are more than capable of, that leaves their partner with 12 totes left behind the alliance wall. Both 1678 and 118 could take care of those, but 118 could also get any available landfill totes and/or build the third superstack, so unless the alliance was absolutely sure every landfill tote would be unavailable and that 1671 could produce three stacks, I would run 118.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

My assumption would be for 1671 to handle 2x 42 stacks from the left station (plus change), and 118 to handle 1x 42 stack from the right station (plus change and loose bins in the landfill). With 1678, you're limiting the score of at least one of your bins to a 36 point stack, rather than a 42, and possibly hindering your ability to collect whatever loose landfill bins are accessible.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

Thanks for correcting me, I thought 118 was landfill only. Yeah, I mentioned they would run out of totes, but with 118 more than capable of using the HP station, I would put them in place of 1678 too because if they do run out of totes 118 can try and make stacks from the landfill. 118 provides a much more flexible robot, whether it's creating capped 6 stacks from the HP station or the landfill. I agree with you that running 118 over 1678 is a smarter choice in the 900/5012 can battle situation.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

that makes no sense, though. you're losing 2 stacks worth of points... In a good game, 1671 can put up 3 stacks of 6 (I've seen video of them doing so). if 118 was not on the field, I would probably expect them to do 3 stacks of 6 from the feeder, dealing with all of the containers. I'd then have 1678 do 2 uncapped 6 stacks, and then try to get something out of the messed up landfill, since they have a wheeled collector. but this is all speculation, really, since it didnt happen

Edit:

that works too

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

The statement begins and ends with "In a good game." If 1671 doesn't have a top flight game and fails to put up 3x 42, you've almost certainly lost the match. Allowing 118 to take one of the three containers greatly reduces the stress on 1671 and ensures all three containers' value is maximized.

You're not losing any uncapped stacks worth of points. Not the (and change) statements. That refers to uncapped stacks being placed after the capped stacks. Especially once you remove the time investment for 1671 to acquire and noodle their 3rd can, they should be able to get the same raw total of totes placed as you proposed (or more). 118 could work 1678's volume from the right station and is better suited to the additional totes from the landfill.

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I suppose that makes sense... when you said "and some change", I assumed like, 3 totes, not a full stack :P

Edit: one thing I did notice in 118's reveal video is that they used a different collector (It looked pretty much just like 1678's) when doing feeder station as compared to landfill- I don't know how this would affect their landfill abilities, though...

Re: Alliance Captain versus last pick in Alliance Selection
 

I totally agree. FIRST isn't about winning, though winning is a nice intensive, FIRST is about learning and about the experience. I would rather my team tried its hardest and failed and learn from that, then any thing else. Besides if you have accomplished everything what else is there to look up to. If you have a dream, make that dream you life. Everyone's dream should be to be the best they can be and to learn the most they can learn. So if they're best isn't THE best of everyone they can accept it and stop trying or they can try even harder for the next match or the next competition or the next season. But I'm just one person. But if 10 or 100 or 1000 or even 100,000 people don't care about winning but instead care about the reasons of FIRST we WILL change the game and how people see it.